tax, not dollar for dollar, but 50% of what you spend, or some percentage of what you spend on the improvements is deducted from the property taxes. >> correct. >> okay. not including the part -- okay. the only thing i wonder is there is -- yes, the park that is there now isn't the park at 1907 obviously but it's been a park the same for a while now and the neighborhood needs assurance the city wouldn't do renovation of the park and put grass in and redwood chips. is there any assurance the park will be kept in its present state? >> the park is contributed as a contributor to the ceqa historic districts so future alterations to the park would need considered environmental review, and we did have a discussion

early on with rec and park who was concerned about potentially having any review of the harvey milk center for example and we tried to emphasize it's unusual connection between the park and the buildings, the lack of a physical separation of the roadway, these park entrances, and they understood that, and they agreed that these small were the most important areas. >> a couple more things. when you do interior changes -- let's say you want to put a new kitchen in one of these you wouldn't be necessarily restricted in how did you that. >> correct. >> you wouldn't need a certificate until it was entirely interior. >> correct. the affordable care act only applies to exterior

improvements. >> >> >> and there was one gentleman that said he needed a huge number for the under grounding which is in place. i think we have the historic light post in that district but he needed a huge number of the people in the district to do that, and he feels there wasn't -- the bar wasn't as high for this. i'm not sure how we -- >> so the planning code doesn't require owner consent for landmarks or landmark district. this effort to engage the community and conduct an online poll is at the impetus of the community and also supervisor scott wiener. we felt we did due diligence. we mailed all property owners and tenants in the district notification about the online questionnaire. the supervisor scott wiener also sent out an email to everyone

that contacted his office about it and encouraged them to contact the neighbors. i sent out emails to anyone that attended any event and provided a link to the online questionnaire. we checked to see if there were return mailings and i didn't see any. we do make copies of all the mailing labels and i did check to make sure we sent these out and i count account for why some people missed or i can't -- >> it's like a lot of people don't vote. you can't make people respond, and the final question is does this trigger any necessarily required improvements to any of the properties that are there now? >> no. it does not. >> okay. they would however could take advantage of the

mills act if they wanted to take it off and restore the wood they would get the mills credit for that. >> correct. and should add the shipts in the mills act contract can apply for low level of staff review. >> thank you. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, i think -- i don't want to beat the mills act to death here, but supervisor wiener did change it i think much -- it's a much better program i think than what existed previously and the mills act has been around -- i forgot, 10 years or more at this point and there have been few mills act contracts in the city because the previous program didn't work very well and hopefully this streamlining will add to more people coming forward. for example provided consulting services on at least

five to six mills act contracts that were eventually approved by the city. just to give some examples the programs -- it's a state enabling legislation i guess you would term it. cities and counties around the state can either implement it or not implement it. san diego, the city of san diego i think has probably close to 300 mills acts contracts at this point. do you know? >> i know los angeles has 500 and san diego has 1200. >> oh okay. and so i think the program does work. the program can be tailored by each city slightly, but hopefully this demonstrates that perhaps even here in san francisco property owners can benefit from the program. i also like to say

that i believe the issues before the commission are slightly different than the kinds of things we have talked about so far and what people have presented because the actual recommendation for whether this should be a historic district or not, and that it meets the criteria february being a his tordistrict. >> >> are in the purview of this historic preservation commission. it has come to the planning commission to find whether the historic district has any conflicts with things like the general plan and other sustainable policies and what not, so we're not really here to talk about windows, and we're not really here to talk about exterior alterations or interior altderations are good or bad and get reviewed or not. it's to see whether the provisions in the ordinance itself has any conflicts with the general plan and i think the staff has analyzed that very well. i

just read. i can't say it any better. "the proposed district is consistent with the general plan policies in the code. the market octavia plan and the sustainable strategy for the bay area, and will not necessitate any general plan amendments" and based on that i'm going to go ahead and make a motion that we recommend to the board of supervisors the approval of the district -- i believe the resolution wording is "that the commission hereby recommends approval article 10 of the proposed park landmark district incorporating the non substantive modifications to the designation ordinance as detailed on january 12, 2013 case report, and directs the planning department to transmit its recommendation and the comments of this commission to

the board of supervisors. >> second. >> commissioner moore did you have another comment? >> yes. talk about general plan compliance as well. >> just one final comment. i think it's also important i think for the commission that this is the first time that we've considered a historic district under the new historic preservation ordinance and i think it's also the first one the historic preservation commission has respected to the board of supervisors, so this say first for a couple of things. thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> continue on that. it's the first time that it was in all of the market octavia plan and this subject came up for years and years and consistently repeated recommendations and comments by the community that we are supporting the nomination as

described by commissioner sugaya and his motion. >> commissioner antonini. >> and i also want to thank the historic preservation commission and the staff for preparing the draft for duboce park landmark district designation went which is wonderful history to read and you learn a lot of things about san francisco's history in reading it, and particularly fernando nelson who had a 77 year career and did many areas of the city so very long and very good career. >> commissioner moore. >> i do think this a point also. thank supervisor wiener for his work and fast tracking modification and reinterpretation of the mills act. if los angeles and san diego are examples this can be

used successfully in historic neighborhoods and we should be right on the heels with a large number of applications. >> commissioner sugaya. >> one last comment on the historic preservation element. i think the gentleman that testified had a copy from 1987. you might be the only person in the city that has that. the historic preservation element was never adopted so legally technically, whatever you want to call it, there isn't a current historic preservation element in the general plan but i encourage you to make a copy of that and send it to the planning director and we previously talked about preservation element as part of the work program. >> make a copy. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to adopt the resolution recommending approval. commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> commissioner borderon. >> aye. >> commissioner hillis. >> aye.

>> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner president fong. >> aye. >> that passes unanimously and places you have item 14 at 2895 san bruno avenue. where f -- request for conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon members of the planning commission. the project at 2895 san bruno avenue proposes to demolish the gas station and construct a new development of mix used buildings total of 10 dwellings units and retail spaces and second floor business professional service uses. the building will contain approximately 14,000 square feet and 40 feet in height. there have been a number of modifications to the project since publication of the materials. however these changes were interior. it

doesn't affect the facade or the footprint of the parks spaces have increased from 10 to 15 and to address the neighborhood's concern about lack of parking and this change is interior again and not affect the facade or building envelope and bike spaces have increased also and interior and will not affect the exterior or knowledge envelope. proposition. >> >> c that is effective and reduced affordable housing requirements by 20%. the required number of affordable housing for the project has been reduced from two to one. the project will provide 10 family sized dwelling units with family stock of one of which is affordable unit. protject will convert a site into productive mix used development. it's consistent with respect to the existing neighborhood character and appropriate in fill

development and complements the pattern and provides transition from highway 101 to the east and directly behind to the property to the mex use neighborhood across the street. project promotes the local businesses and the use of the district and would not replace a retail tenant because the project is vacant and consistent with the octaves and policies of the general plan and complies with the local first hiring program. that concludes my presentation and staff recommends approval with conditions and i am available for questions. >> thank you. project sponsor. >> good afternoon commissioners. jeremy shaw project architect with gable architects. i just wanted to briefly go over the history of this project. i am

sure you have seen a drawing. this is our third time being here so just want to go over the history of our client purchasing the project in 2010. we submitted the conditional use application in july of that year and have been working on this for two and a half years now and the first notice on 2011 and the notice of intent to do environmental review. we've had since then two other neighborhood notifications for pre-application and conditional use and we have been in contact with a couple different neighborhood groups, and we had a second neighborhood meeting on the week before thanksgiving this year -- or last year. we've worked through some revisions with the neighborhood

groups, and we think we have a project that the neighborhood should be in full support of. i will be available for any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. i'm going to open it up to public comments and a couple of speaker cards here. irene kreskoa. shane sew, allen lie and theresa dickcue. >> good evening president fong and commissioners. my name is irene kreshio and this is henny laura and we're board members of the neighborhood association, pna, and long-term residents of the district. we are here to support the development of the 2895 san bruno avenue project as is in their latest blue print. many of the other members were want able to be here, so i will

be speaking on their behalf. i have a letter to read that was sent to president fong, and i have copies here for president fong and the commissioners. thank you. so i will read the letter and it says "dear commissioner fong the neighborhood association, the pna, a group of residents, merchants and stakeholders of the district urges the commission to approve the development proposed -- proposal located at 2895 san bruno avenue. since 2004 we have been working to improve the corridor by greening beautification elements. past efforts include the planning of over a hundred lilies, installation of wine barrel

planners and numerous trees along the corridor. the pna hosted a community meeting with jeremy shaw, gabriel ying, architects presented updates from the original plan which included a number of greening conditions that the pna has requested. mr. shaw and staff worked closely with the pna on their request maintaining ongoing communications with the community. upon reviewing the most recent plan dated december 6, 2012 we are happy to support the project based on conditional use. we are confident that the architects and owners of the property will continue to work with the community to insure this is a project that everyone can be proud of. we look forward to continually working with them"

and one thing i wanted to say. maybe you don't already know, but the group, the neighborhood and environment network has given them an award for the best come back neighborhood of 2012 and i thought that might be of interest to you, so again we ask you for your support on this development. thank you. >> thank you. shane sew, allen lie, theresa dickcue. >> good afternoon. i'm living in the san bruno avenue and strict parking there already congested and all day long and if you build the building, the full story, it will cost to double park and a lot of

accidents, the car accidents. that's why -- i live across the street i'm not safe at all. that's why we have to omit one floor, one story of that building because it's full story. if that area they don't have full story houses. and also the parking. i am living just across the street and i experience of the parking because all of the parking i will see everyday, and the business for us is already reduced a lot as i believe if they build the full building and a lot of people and dwelling and offices and commercial it would

cost a lot of cost. parking makes the people -- people will fight for the parking for sure. if you would live there you would see it. that's why i am against that building to have the fourth story and then i live across the street. i am very experience of my whole family come back home can't find any parking at all, and we can park very far, four blocks and at night it's very dangerous. i hope you are against the fourth story. you can omit one story and have parking for the whole people. that's my item. thank you. >> thank you.

>> hello commissioner interpreter. >> how are you guys? >> [speaking foreign language] >> i'm a man in this neighborhood. >> [speaking foreign language] >> i'm also speaking for other businessmen in this neighborhood. >> excuse me. if i could just interrupt you. if you could state your name for the record? >> i'm sorry? >> if he could state his name for the record. >> my name is allen lye. >> [speaking foreign language] >> parking is a real extreme important issue on this street.

>> [speaking foreign language] >> a lot of customer get parking tickets from time to time. >> [speaking foreign language] >> of course we are not against the building. >> [speaking foreign language] >> i wish they could reserve the parking space for the neighborhood to use. >> [speaking foreign language] >> consider the building is tall so you can think how much parking space can be reserved. >> [speaking foreign language] >> that's all i got to say. i

hope you gentlemen can understand my voice. >> okay. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner. good afternoon. my name is theresa dukekey and manager for the san francisco apartment center. i'm just -- this is my -- the letters and also we will present most -- you know, we are presenting the asian community. okay. this community having discuss the project at 2895 san bruno avenue with local merchants and concerned community member. although we are in general support the development goal to improve a vacant lot but we cannot fully support the project as

currently designed. our special concern is as follow. number one, as proposed the project would negligently impact the area with offices. san bruno avenue is already congested during all hours of the day. i don't know if you know that san bruno avenue is a very narrow street. the second one is the street parking is already severe limited and we believe that the square footage of the store front offices should have additional parking. number three, san bruno avenue is a transition and vacants and [inaudible] is ongoing concern. this project will exacerbate the problem. we don't believe the corridor can accommodate the

store front and office space and another 10 residential. we are very concerned about the layout of the second floor could be post inspection, illegal resident conversions so when you look at the plan it can be easily converted into res residentials. okay. when you see the -- you know, san bruno avenue that's a lot of vacant offices there and number four, the project will be the only building along san bruno avenue that is four stories. we understand this is allowed under the planning code but we are very concerned that no effort will soften the visual impact of the building. at the fourth floor the building is out of scale with the pad along the corridor. we believe that the height of the building -- profit driven only and just now we're

are talking we want to reserve the preservations of san bruno avenue. it's all breen breen is three story. we want to reserve that preservations so one of the core beliefs of the empowerment center is to find solutions. we offer the option for your consideration. remove the second floor -- >> ma'am, i'm sorry. your three minutes are up. >> okay. we have other -- i have a letter but the main thing -- >> thank you. >> we have other signature from the business. >> thank you. your three minutes are up. >> 80% are against the project. >> thank you. you can leave that with us if you like. is there any additional public comment on this item? okay. seeing none the public comment portion is closed. commissioner antonini. >> i had a few questions on the project. i'm just making sure

i have the staff report correct. since our last hearing and this has been changed and we now have 15 parking places instead of just the 10, so and that would be some residential and some commercial. how would the distribution be? maybe the architect could answer? >> jeremy shaw, project architect. we converted the proposed two car garage in the rear to three car garage and utilizing all spaces and it's exclusively for the residential. >> okay. so you now have -- i guess you've got how many total units on this. >> 10. >> so 1.5. that's fine. that makes sense to me. the other question i have, and maybe this a question i will just ask you.

these are for sale units? >> undetermined at this point. >> yeah, but i mean your condo conversion -- >> they will be condo mapped. >> i was trying to look through and read -- i should have done this in the report. are the conversions all two bedrooms? >> this is something ben and i was talking about outside. there are different sizes. >> so you've got good size units. that's very good. >> yeah. >> now the final thing and i am concerned about staff had brought up the -- you've got ground floor retail and then you've got second floor office. >> correct. >> and i would like to suggest to the commissioners that we pass some notice of special restrictions to ensure the community they're not converted into living units and there be some kind of specification that inspections are made. >> sure. >> on a regular basis to make

sure they're uses are conforming and the purpose is what stated for and not to add more residents which would negate the more parking because they would have more cars. >> sure. >>i think that occurs most of my questions and the design is good and good addition for the neighborhood. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes just a question probably by commissioner antonini and some testimony. would residential be allowed on the second floor anyway? >> residential will be allowed on the second floor. >> and then -- but then we have a parking issue. is that correct. >> well, not necessarily. the lot does allow total 14 residential units so they can -- up to 14. >> okay. so it's conceivable that even if we approve -- if we approve it